On why "it's a small change, why do you bother" and "Bob's heart is in the right place, let his little superstition be" is a load of rotten horseshit:
a thread.

Inspired by DMs I got for mocking the "Alexa, Cortana and other glowpucks getting called bad words" paranoia and /

recent @Aelkus thread.

common response to superstitious idiots demanding changes without any evidence of harm coming from not making those changes / gains obtained by making those changes is claiming that change is "small" and "harmless" and thus the idiots should be appeased /

(sometimes, no change is being explicitly demanded but bullshit is nonetheless being spread - such as say astrology being promoted by a fellow employee, or a relative demanding that you follow a bunch of stupid rituals to neutralize ebil ghosts that watch everyone's every step) /

and the superstition is again positioned as harmless and not worth "ruffling feathers" over /

FIRST, I got to say that from a utilitarian and interpersonal-relationship management standpoint, a situation where "not raising shit" is optimal is plausible (you probably don't want to aggravate or ostracize a genius physicist because of stupid horseshoe) BUT BUT BUT /

while at some scales and in some cases some variants of these behaviors may be harmless (OK, Jane the very reliable javascript programmer believes in spooky star influences, it's manageable), it should not be considered a rule and indeed such shenanigans are often not harmless /

first, on an interpersonal level appeasing someone's idiotic delusions when those are being actively and assertively publicly expressed is a classical boundary-setting problem, and as in any case of unset boundary the behavior is liable to escalate to some degree /

on an organizational/social level, ESPECIALLY in cases where the behavior is not just limited to public expression of obviously horseshit views about spooky invisible zombie ghosts that stalk everyone, but some action and/or change, no matter how small and trivial, is demanded /

deciding to cede to the delusional weirdos and take action / make change (Okay Bob, your heart is in the right place so we will install as small Shrine to the Blood-Feathered Burning Skull at all launch facilities), a certain feedback is initiated where the delusional weirdo /

is now in good position to demand further changes based on his/her delusional epistemological system (and idiotic evidence-free claims of "need for change/action" are quite often and indeed quite reasonably part of idiotic dysfunctional epistemology) and you no longer have a /

good counterargument against ritualistic evidence-free horseshit because you already ceded to the alleged utility of installing feather-bloodskull shrines at launch facilities and/or using /

"polygraphs" for sensitive personnel screening, or "sensitivity training", or regulating "subliminal ads", or UFO defense program, or whatever other delusional bullshit Bob previously talked you into implementing based on no evidence whatsoever (or very shit-tier evidence)

It has been brought to my attention that the thread ends on a bit of a cliffhanger, so, to slightly expand:

Even when bullshit is not used to demand ever more egregious bullshit (by leveraging the fact that you no longer have a counterargument), even small bullshit has costs >

These costs are kind of obvious when the bullshit is grand and organization is important (CIA not only wastes money on polygraph examinations that do not - and can not - work, it also regularly loses a large number of high quality human resources simply because >

an idiotic procedure that is essentially a wypipo analogue of consulting with Loa has indicated, without any sound ground whatsoever, that those people are not trustworthy. The costs of this loss are impossible to even estimate) >

It might seem that bullshit in the form of Karen from HR believing in astrology is way "smaller" and carries no costs ... that is, it seems so until hiring (and possibly firing) decisions start being influenced by star-spooky-action stuff (yes it happened and is googlable) >

so, to wrap up, while, as said previously, there may be contexts in which tolerating someone's absurd superstitious or just downright kooky bullshit may be "worth it", always mind the costs, and the fact that bullshit is never "cost free" and never harmless.